Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 120
  1. #21
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "Marrdro" wrote:

    Seriously though, why does everyone think coaches cover thier mouths when they call in the plays and have a second guy sending in dummy signals to the defense?
    I always thought it was bad breath.
    :-

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  2. #22
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "singersp" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:

    Seriously though, why does everyone think coaches cover thier mouths when they call in the plays and have a second guy sending in dummy signals to the defense?
    I always thought it was bad breath.
    :-\
    Quit.
    Your cracking me up.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,206

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "Chazz" wrote:
    I don't get the anger directed towards Goodell.
    I just think he's doing the responsible thing and acting on what he knows.



    Why would he have seen or heard about a tape from the Rams' walkthrough?
    Even assuming that the Patriots did video tape the walkthrough, why would Belichick keep the tape and hand it over to Goodell?


    The only reason to admit to it earlier this year would be if Belichick thought he might get caught with it later.
    If the tape had been destroyed sometime in the past five years (it almost certainly would have been), then there would be no evidence.
    Even if someone comes forward, as they are now, it's not going to be easy to pin anything on the team.

    So when Goodell says that he's not aware of this, I don't think he's trying to brush it off.
    I think he's being honest.
    More than that, he promised that if new information came to light that showed the Patriots lied to him about the nature or quantity of their illegal taping operations, he would lay the smack down.
    By saying he's not aware of this, all Goodell is doing is leaving that avenue open.


    So I don't think people giving Goodell a hard time for this are on the right track.
    The people giving the team a hard time probably are.
    The Patriots either did this or they didn't, but I don't believe an NFL cover-up is in progress.
    You don't destroy evidence....unless you want to hide something.
    Goodell destroying the tapes displays to me that there was plenty of evidence to support that the pats titles were not entirely earned. So he destroys the tapes to try and protect the integrity of the NFL.
    If he would have kept the tapes he could've proved there was nothing shady about there titles. Which then brings you back to the question, why did he destroy the tapes?
    Goodell has given a reason for why he destroyed the tapes.
    It was a way to increase the chances of catching the Pats if they were lying about having destroyed their own copies of the tapes.
    If one of those tapes ever pops up, then he'll know that the Pats had a copy lying around.
    You might not think that was the right decision or you might not believe him, but it is a reason.

    Regardless, I wasn't talking about Goodell destroying tapes, I was talking about whether Goodell would have been aware of the Patriots filming the Rams' walkthrough.
    People are assuming that he was lying when he said he wasn't aware of that.
    Why is it so hard to believe that he was telling the truth?
    Why would the team have told him about this other stuff that he didn't know about or suspect?

    Here's an analogy: imagine you're a kid and your dad catches you with some weed.
    He wants you to give him everything you have and tell him any drugs you've ever done.
    He tells you he's going to search your room so you better not be hiding anything or you'll really get it.
    If you had also done cocain but didn't have any at the time, would you tell him?
    Probably not.
    Now, what if one of your friends later lets slip that you had done it?
    Do you admit to it, or do you say your friend was joking/lying?

    That's kind of where the Pats are now.
    One of their old employees is now coming forward and spilling the beans.
    But without any hard evidence, even that might not be enough.
    So why would they admit to it now?
    And why would they have admitted to it earlier?
    When the age of the Vikings came to a close, they must have sensed it. Probably, they gathered together one evening, slapped each other on the back and said, "Hey, good job." - Jack Handey [Deep Thoughts]

  4. #24
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "Overlord" wrote:
    "Chazz" wrote:
    I don't get the anger directed towards Goodell.
    I just think he's doing the responsible thing and acting on what he knows.



    Why would he have seen or heard about a tape from the Rams' walkthrough?
    Even assuming that the Patriots did video tape the walkthrough, why would Belichick keep the tape and hand it over to Goodell?


    The only reason to admit to it earlier this year would be if Belichick thought he might get caught with it later.
    If the tape had been destroyed sometime in the past five years (it almost certainly would have been), then there would be no evidence.
    Even if someone comes forward, as they are now, it's not going to be easy to pin anything on the team.

    So when Goodell says that he's not aware of this, I don't think he's trying to brush it off.
    I think he's being honest.
    More than that, he promised that if new information came to light that showed the Patriots lied to him about the nature or quantity of their illegal taping operations, he would lay the smack down.
    By saying he's not aware of this, all Goodell is doing is leaving that avenue open.


    So I don't think people giving Goodell a hard time for this are on the right track.
    The people giving the team a hard time probably are.
    The Patriots either did this or they didn't, but I don't believe an NFL cover-up is in progress.
    You don't destroy evidence....unless you want to hide something.
    Goodell destroying the tapes displays to me that there was plenty of evidence to support that the pats titles were not entirely earned. So he destroys the tapes to try and protect the integrity of the NFL.
    If he would have kept the tapes he could've proved there was nothing shady about there titles. Which then brings you back to the question, why did he destroy the tapes?
    Goodell has given a reason for why he destroyed the tapes.
    It was a way to increase the chances of catching the Pats if they were lying about having destroyed their own copies of the tapes.
    If one of those tapes ever pops up, then he'll know that the Pats had a copy lying around.
    You might not think that was the right decision or you might not believe him, but it is a reason.

    Regardless, I wasn't talking about Goodell destroying tapes, I was talking about whether Goodell would have been aware of the Patriots filming the Rams' walkthrough.
    People are assuming that he was lying when he said he wasn't aware of that.
    Why is it so hard to believe that he was telling the truth?
    Why would the team have told him about this other stuff that he didn't know about or suspect?

    Here's an analogy: imagine you're a kid and your dad catches you with some weed.
    He wants you to give him everything you have and tell him any drugs you've ever done.
    He tells you he's going to search your room so you better not be hiding anything or you'll really get it.
    If you had also done cocain but didn't have any at the time, would you tell him?
    Probably not.
    Now, what if one of your friends later lets slip that you had done it?
    Do you admit to it, or do you say your friend was joking/lying?

    That's kind of where the Pats are now.
    One of their old employees is now coming forward and spilling the beans.
    But without any hard evidence, even that might not be enough.
    So why would they admit to it now?
    And why would they have admitted to it earlier?
    If he has the tapes in his personal possession & has sole control over them under lock & key & one happens to pop up, wouldn't it stand to reason their are additional tapes out there?

    Could it be possible he never destroyed the tapes & still has them in his possession? Buy letting everyone believe he destroyed them, it would prevent people from trying to acquire them since they believe they no longer exist.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  5. #25
    happy camper's Avatar
    happy camper is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,445

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    OR maybe he wants us to think that he didn't destroy them when he actually did.
    "There is good and there is evil. And evil must be punished. Even in the face of Armageddon I will not compromise."

  6. #26
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    [size=13pt]Goodell would give indemnification to Walsh for materials from Pats' days[/size]

    By Chris Mortensen
    ESPN.com


    Updated: February 6, 2008, 6:50 PM ET


    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl that the NFL is willing to give former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh legal indemnification for any information and materials he would provide to the league regarding his work with the Patriots.....

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  7. #27
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "singersp" wrote:
    [size=13pt]Goodell would give indemnification to Walsh for materials from Pats' days[/size]

    By Chris Mortensen
    ESPN.com


    Updated: February 6, 2008, 6:50 PM ET


    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl that the NFL is willing to give former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh legal indemnification for any information and materials he would provide to the league regarding his work with the Patriots.....

    Walsh, who is now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won their first Super Bowl after the 2001 season, and was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into New England illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    : Glad to see Goodell did a thorough job in his investigation.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  8. #28
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,599
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "singersp" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    [size=13pt]Goodell would give indemnification to Walsh for materials from Pats' days[/size]

    By Chris Mortensen
    ESPN.com


    Updated: February 6, 2008, 6:50 PM ET


    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl that the NFL is willing to give former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh legal indemnification for any information and materials he would provide to the league regarding his work with the Patriots.....

    Walsh, who is now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won their first Super Bowl after the 2001 season, and was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into New England illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    : Glad to see Goodell did a thorough job in his investigation.
    It is my impression that the NFL didn't investigate NE illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    They investigated a single incident from a single complaint about NE taping the Jets sideline on the first game of the year...
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  9. #29
    VikingMike's Avatar
    VikingMike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    [size=13pt]Goodell would give indemnification to Walsh for materials from Pats' days[/size]

    By Chris Mortensen
    ESPN.com


    Updated: February 6, 2008, 6:50 PM ET


    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl that the NFL is willing to give former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh legal indemnification for any information and materials he would provide to the league regarding his work with the Patriots.....

    Walsh, who is now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won their first Super Bowl after the 2001 season, and was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into New England illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    : Glad to see Goodell did a thorough job in his investigation.
    It is my impression that the NFL didn't investigate NE illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    They investigated a single incident from a single complaint about NE taping the Jets sideline on the first game of the year...

    I agree...the last thing Goodell wanted was a major scandal involving one of the top franchises. But that's exactly what he is facing now.
    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H.L. Mencken

    Come from the land of the ice and snow...

  10. #30
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198

    Re: Patriots employee filmed Rams the night before Super Bowl XXXVI

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    [size=13pt]Goodell would give indemnification to Walsh for materials from Pats' days[/size]

    By Chris Mortensen
    ESPN.com


    Updated: February 6, 2008, 6:50 PM ET


    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl that the NFL is willing to give former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh legal indemnification for any information and materials he would provide to the league regarding his work with the Patriots.....

    Walsh, who is now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won their first Super Bowl after the 2001 season, and was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into New England illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    : Glad to see Goodell did a thorough job in his investigation.
    It is my impression that the NFL didn't investigate NE illegally taping opposing coaches in the last two years.
    They investigated a single incident from a single complaint about NE taping the Jets sideline on the first game of the year...
    There was more than one complaint this year. The Jaguars I believe also complained. You'd think he would have investigated all the complaints seeing how they are all inter related around Belicheck & the Patriots.

    Belichick has been coaching the Pats since 2000 & the recent allegations against the Pats is from the Rams /Pats Super Bowl game 6 years ago.

    One has to wonder how long this has been going on, but apparently not Goodell.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 176
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 01:28 AM
  2. Ex-Patriot Walsh asks for protection to release Spygate tapes
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 03-10-2008, 05:56 AM
  3. LXXX years of Super Bowl history - Vikings to win Super Bowl XLVI?
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-28-2008, 07:03 PM
  4. Worst Super Bowl Moments (Super Bowls I-XL)
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-08-2006, 11:54 PM
  5. FAT PAT'S attitude...
    By dbalke10 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 11-26-2005, 08:47 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •